I've just acquired a rather lovely Fowler 4F 0-6-0 because i felt it had more than a passing resemblance to a Maunsell Q class 0-6-0.
I've got the new model 372-060 in late BR livery with the Fowler tender.
I remember the old Graham Hughes kit for this, and have seen it go for silly money on thee Bay, but has anyone attempted a mod like this?
I think, for example that they might have had the same tenders as the Farish N class, but what else should i hack?
I've attached a couple of photos below showing their similarity. Or is it sacrilege to cut and shut a modern loco design?
Bob
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/61/1517-070218171044.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=61656)
Q class
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/61/1517-070218171120.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=61657)
4F
Not sacrilege at all! I have just cut the cabs off one of the latest Farish Deltics to provide some for DP2, much better than the resin ones. Go for it, be very interested to see how it turns out.
I did one some years ago the awkward bit was reshaping the bottom of the firebox, the Q tapers quite a bit from about level with the centre line of the boiler. I do have a Hughes kit in the to do box.
Quite aq few pics on the SEMG site
http://www.semgonline.com/steam/qclass_01.html (http://www.semgonline.com/steam/qclass_01.html)
Firebox shows well on 30547 picv near bottom of second page.
very interesting thread, I will watch with interest as i have also considered such a conversion. I remember in 'OO' sclae, there was a conversion kit for the Airfix 4F to do a Q years ago by a company called Crownline - sorely missed manufacturer
Best wishes
Simon
Not sure if I'm barking up the wrong tree here, but, didn't Union Mills do the Q class??
Quote from: Shiney Sheff on February 07, 2018, 09:30:48 PM
Not sure if I'm barking up the wrong tree here, but, didn't Union Mills do the Q class??
No, they do the ex LSWR 700 and 0395 classes, Midland 2F & 3F
Quote from: Dorsetmike on February 07, 2018, 08:35:54 PM
I did one some years ago the awkward bit was reshaping the bottom of the firebox, the Q tapers quite a bit from about level with the centre line of the boiler. I do have a Hughes kit in the to do box.
Surely they are almost modern image for you, Mike?
Bob
Quote from: Bob G on February 07, 2018, 10:47:19 PM
Surely they are almost modern image for you, Mike?
Bob
Right at the edge so to speak, 1933-38, so I sould just manage 530 - 540 built betwen Jan and Dec 1938 541 - 549 came out Jan - Sep '39. Looking at the shed allocations on SEMG the first to be allocated away from Eastleigh were 537,8,9 in 1939 so I'd probably have to run one of the earlier ones an a "running in turn".
The "running in turn" excuse is quite handy actually, as just about anything just out of works either new or after overhaul would do a number of local (ish) runs to check for problems before returning to their home shed or re-allocated elsewhere.
Well I have done some research, and the Midland 4F has arrived. Side by side, the dimensions are a very good match indeed. And it is lovely to watch the connecting rods through the gap beneath the boiler and through the spokes of the wheels.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/61/1517-100218122901.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=61743)
Firstly i did what all naughty boys do and took it apart (all in the interest of science and engineering of course). I've also put an N class tender body for comparison with the Fowler.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/61/1517-100218123042.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=61744)
Now i could see what modifications were possible and what were not.
Front buffer beam. The stepped look (see my original photo of the real 4F to see the step in the buffer beam) could be fixed, but I'm tempted just to paint the step out and fit new thin side frame parts to mask the stepped rise in the running plate in front of the smokebox.
Chimney. The 4F chimney is just fractionally smaller in diameter than the Standard 4 chimney fitted to six of the class in BR days, so it stays and that limits my choice of number.
Chassis side frames. There is not room behind the splashers to add the stepped look of the side frames, because the wheels need the space for clearance, so this wont be done.
Plumbing. There is ample space for the plumbing bits on the outside to be moved around and added, so it can be made to look more like a Maunsell Q.
Firebox. The hollowed look of the Maunsell Q firebox also won't be possible - the space is taken up by the gearbox, but there is lovely light under the boiler, so i will try to disguise the firebox shape with some additional boxes and plumbing on the outside.
Cab. This is the hardest bit of the modification. I really need an N body and do a cut and shut with bits of the cab, but even that cab will need surgery to add the side cab windows, and the front cab windows on the N are not right either. The Fowler cab just doesn't look right at all.
Tender. The Fowler tender has been used in other kits in OO scale as the basis for modifications. Its not too dissimilar in fact, but the N class would be a better swap. The tender chassis are similar - only the pattern of the leaf springs are obviously different - so the mods here could be (1) the Fowler tender modified a little, (2) an N tender body swap only, or ideally (3) an N body and tender chassis swap. The pickups and mounting for the N tender chassis are similar to the 4F, and the N tender chassis gives the best shaped buffer beam too.
Which running number? Bullied modified all the Maunsells with Lemaitre blast pipe and a short fat chimney. BR then modified 30549 with a Standard 4 blast pipe and stove pipe chimney, and then another six were modified with a Standard 4 blast pipe and Chimney. The Fowler chimney looks a close match to the Standard 4 chimney, so it is one of those six to be modelled.
However, some were used as snowplough engines in the winter of 1962, and i didnt want to model those, and the preserved Q 30541 on the Bluebell only got its Standard 4 blast pipe and chimney in preservation, so it wasnt going to be that one either. I settled on 30530 or 30536 as these were based in the south west of the region (Bournemouth and Eastleigh) in the early 1960s before moving to Nine Elms and Three Bridges just before they were withdrawn.
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/61/1517-100218125158.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=61745)
(http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/gallery/61/1517-100218125211.jpeg) (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=gallery;sa=view&id=61746)
So there you have it. A nice little project with slightly less to do than i had originally thought. So it might be done in a few years at current modelling progress rates!
If anyone has a spare N class body and tender, I'll be happy to relieve you of it, for a small sum, and if anyone has a better idea for the cab, please share that idea.
HTH
Bob
Right. This is where the fun begins.
I've acquired a "dead" N class (Thank you @Steve Purves (http://www.ngaugeforum.co.uk/SMFN/index.php?action=profile;u=3055)) and this will donate complete tender, upper cab parts and smokebox valves.
But I need to check over the electrics of the tender first, and maybe figure why the N is dead, and make sure when I swap tenders and PCBs I won't blow the 4F's motor.
When it sits on the track, the N is open circuit. I can run the 4F up to it with no shorting.
Any clues what might have blown, and what can I and can't I do to test the coreless motor. Does it have to run through the PCB (which is only two components, C1 and C2 (what are they, and do they blow/how can I check/can they be replaced?)
I have plenty experience with older Farish but have never fiddled with a new model before. Am trying to figure out what is still functioning and what is not, whether I need to translocate the 4F PCB to the N tender or if I can use the N PCB (which is a better fit) with the 4F.
Bob
Many thanks, Bob, for this. It's great pity that the failed PCB is holding you up. I'm a little surprised that no-one can help you with this?
I've often wondered about the uncanny resemblance between Maunsell and Fowler designs. I know the Royal Scots were based (to some extent) on the Lord Nelsons. I wonder if there was a reciprocal arrangement for Maunsell to borrow the plans for LMS 0-6-0s and 4-4-0s?
Interesting. My thought would be a 3D printed body but it looks like the donor chassis would rule out the Q's tapered firebox.
Quote from: longbow on March 02, 2020, 11:31:51 PM
Interesting. My thought would be a 3D printed body but it looks like the donor chassis would rule out the Q's tapered firebox.
I would also be very interested in buying a 3D printed body to fit on the 4F chassis.
Check out the Tiny Underground Models Facebook site for a new 3D printed Q body to fit a 4F chassis and N tender. It looks good, and uses parts from N Brass to detail the shell. I've got all the bits so my order will be going in soon!
Dave
Quote from: Southerngooner on March 13, 2020, 12:31:05 PM
Check out the Tiny Underground Models Facebook site for a new 3D printed Q body to fit a 4F chassis and N tender. It looks good, and uses parts from N Brass to detail the shell. I've got all the bits so my order will be going in soon!
Dave
Yes, Dave. I saw that, today, and it looks very good but very expensive as it requires 2 locos! However, the N loco. chassis can go under a 3D printed W tank. That leaves a 4F tender. 8-(
Yes, I'm lucky in that I already have a 4F bought fairly cheaply, plus the N tender left from my W conversion (which I must post about soon). All in all I think it's around £40 for the body and N Brass parts, plus a 4F chassis, plus the tender....quite a bit. But it looks a good model and saves a lot of cutting and shutting hopefully!
Dave
How did you get the W print to fit the N chassis???????? I broke the steps off one trying to get the steps to clear the motion; I've so far chickened out on trying the second one, the broken step one will probably end up as a K class "river" tank, although that will require invoking Rule 1 to allow a K class to run on exLSWR lines in the mid to late 1930s.
Hi Mike
I promise I'll finally get round to posting about progress on the W over the weekend. I think I'm ready to start final assembly, with the steps being the only significant outstanding issue. I'm going to do some tests with my N to see how steps can fit and remain in place on a working chassis too, so watch this space!
Dave